SCO’s case against Daimler-Chrysler Dismissed In 18 Minutes

By on July 21, 2004

SCO’s case against Daimler-Chrysler for license infringement went to trial this morning, but didn’t stay long. The judge quickly dismissed all of SCO’s relevant complaints against Daimler.

At 0959, Mr. Rosenbaum was given another minute to answer SCO’s arguments, and broadly stated, “Your Honor, this is a fishing expedition.” In the original complaint, there was no claim that DC had exported the software or disclosed it to anyone outside the company, that the case is about DC’s breach of section 2.05 of the SA. The language of the 2.05 section has nothing about a certification that DC kept the software confidential, at which point the judge looked rather amused.

At 1000 Judge Chabot issued her orders:

Summary disposition is granted except on the matter of breach of section 2.05, in that DC did not submit their response in a timely manner. All other claims were dismissed and she acknowledged that the contract doesn’t require certifications that are outside the language of the contract… .

In other words, things are going well for you if you’re shorting shares of SCO.

Now where did I put my little tiny violin?

Gadgetopia

Comments

  1. While this is a great and all, it seems to me from reading the accounts, that the question of the validity of SCOs overall claims was never brought up. Apparently they were suing Daimler-Chrysler over a very small point, not the over-arching “you can’t use Linux without paying us” question.

    SCO shares are actually up just over 2% as I write this. If their core complaint had been cut down by the court, they’d be dropping like a rock right now.

    Still, any day SCO gets kicked in the teeth is a good day.

  2. There’s another link on GrokLaw that has some interesting speculation.: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040501011806928

    The theory is that SCO was planning to sue Bank Of America, but they had to back off of that at the last minute, and rushed the Daimler-Chrysler case through so that they’d be suing when McBride said that they would. If that’s true, they didn’t have any time to build a proper case, and from the sound of the way things played out in court, it sounds like they didn’t have much to stand on. (My understanding of the legal process being limited to the occasional traffic ticket).

    According to this site: http://csua.berkeley.edu/~alpetrof/sco/scorecard.html It looks like most of the real challenges to the Linux claims are stayed pending the outcome of SCO v IBM

  3. Joe’s right. The IBM case is the only one where there’s even remotely any claim against Linux itself and that’s even mostly a contract dispute at this point.They don’t have a single case in progress where they are suing someone for using Linux and not paying them a license fee.

    I gotta wonder if it’s somewhat disconcerting for SCO’s lawyers to know the opposing lawyers have earned the nickname Nazgul?

Comments are closed. If you have something you really want to say, email editors@gadgetopia.com and we‘ll get it added for you.